Page 142 [142]
OCR
140 ANNA VARGA — traditional methods of learning (e.g., directly transmitting knowledge from generation to generation through tales and stories, as well as learning directly from nature) (Berkes et al. 2000; Turner et al. 2000; Whiteman — Cooper 2000; Berkes 2008: 203-220; Zs. Molnar 2014). The research into traditional knowledge of nature, including traditional ecological knowledge (e.g. use of medicinal herbs and domestication of diverse animal and plant species) has intrigued the realm of science for thousands of years (first of all, medical and agrarian sciences, e.g., Cato De agriculture [c. 160 BC], Columella De re rustica |c. 61-65 AD; 2005]). Contemporary research in traditional ecological knowledge gathered momentum in the second half of the 20% century, first of all in response to cultural anthropological, ecological and environmentalist questions, and also connected to the protection of the human rights of indigenous people in the colonies (Smith 2010; Hunn 2007; Berkes 2008: 258). These investigations tend to formulate some recommendations for sustainability or nature conservation, which may refer to the solution of the given question (Berkes et al. 2000), or to the support and application of traditional ecological knowledge (Varga et al. 2017b; Varga et al. 2019). In the past decades, there has been a steady increase in conservationist activities which have effectively applied TEK at both theoretical and practical levels (e.g. Hunn et al. 2003: 79; Ens et al. 2015; Roué — Molnar 2017). It is important to mention, however, that there are also some less successful cases. These warn us to have a more thorough knowledge of this kind of cognition and a more humble approach (Nadasdy 1999; Ween Riseth 2011; Padilla — Kofinas 2014; Pooley et al 2014). There can be several factors that aggravate the employment of TEK in science and nature conservation. The extended list of Huntington (2000) and Heikkinen et al. (2012) include: — traditional and academic (Western scientific) knowledge types are fundamentally (e.g. epistemologically) different (Barkes 2008: 10-16); — TEK often provides knowledge of different species and habitats which conservationists would like to protect (Biré et al. 2014); — in many communities, TEK is largely lost, often living in memory alone, and does not form part of living practice (Benz et al. 2000; Biirgi et al. 2013); — the fortress-type nature conservation practice which completely excludes human activity, chased local people away; with them, traditional ecological knowledge of that area also disappeared (Riseth 2007); — owing to the excessively accelerated social, economic and environmental changes, the former traditional ecological knowledge lags behind in adaptation, and may lose validity (Fernandez-Llamazares et al. 2015); — in many cases, only the easily applicable TEK elements (general practical information) were applied to nature conservation (Reo 2011: 1-2), whereas the ethical and effective application of TEK requires that all four aspects of traditional ecological knowledge be integrated and fostered in their entirety (e.g., Nadasdy 1999; Berkes et al. 2000).
